Replies to post #7289 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[Tom K]

Three points:

Just bcause other nations have the capability of producing chemical weapons doesn't mitigate the Iraqi/Terrorist threat. It isn't a reason to do nothing.

Iraq is a priority threat for three reasons. 1. They have the means to do us harm. 2. They have a desire to us harm (I can site several examples). 3. They believe that they could get away with it. (can also site many examples of why I believe this to be true - remember the asassination attempt on Bush Sr.? Did they fear U.S. retailiation?). Just because a country has the means to do us harm doesn't put them in the same league with Saddam.

Most of your examples deal with chemical weapons. Although chem weapons qualify as WMD, Biological and radiological weapons are more effective, thus much more dangerous. Read the Q&A of Dr. Richard Spertzel from the Nov. '02 House Armed Services committee. Frightening stuff.

[goodluck]

ES,
re: your short list of Al Qaeda weapons suppliers besides Saddam-- add N. Korea to the list. Also any number of companies/arms dealers who will deal with anyone with money, including US companies. Arrangements can easily be made with third parties who will cover up who the real buyers are, if necessary.

Also--there is absolutely zero proof that Iraq provides any safe harbor for Al Qaeda; those reports about Al Qaeda camps in the north are absurd; the Kurds wouldn't like it, and if the US/UK actually knew of such things, they could easily bomb them. It would be much easier for them to hide out somewhere in Pakistan, in Tajikistan or one of the other Islamic countries of the former SU, on an Indonesian island somewhere.

We are playing into Al Qaeda's hands with this invasion. We will provide them with more soldiers. We are turning the world against us. We will continue to sap our own financial strength with how much this will cost us, not the invasion so much as the Aftermath. If you break it, you own it, wrote Tom Friedman awhile ago in reference to Iraq. We will own it, but I doubt we will live up to that "ownership." It will prove too difficult, we will wash our hands of it, and declare Iraqis an ungrateful and ungovernable people, or we will install our "own" dictator there who will be hated by most of the people. Talk of imposing a democracy on any people is absurd. Talk of imposing it on a country where a given third of the people have historical grudges against the other two third is truly absurd. Talk of setting a grand "example" for the mideast is equally imaginative, though it's a nice pipedream, I admit. Of course, the Bush Admin will blame naysayers, will blame Islam, will blame the peoples of the countries, will blame everyone but themselves and their own misguided, totally unrealistic policies

If there are coups or civil wars in Turkey or in Pakistan, will it be the fault of this invasion? Or will say, we had nothing to do with that, that's their problem? Or will we invade those countries as well, claiming it our pre-emptive right under the Bush Doctrine?